Iraq’s Other Security Threat: Politics

A man sat Wednesday in front of his Baghdad home, wrecked by one of Tuesday's bombings.Credit
Hadi Mizban/Associated Press

BAGHDAD — The televised confessions came quickly in the days after each of the deadly bombings in August and October that rocked the capital and killed 280 people.

The broadcasts, heavily edited images of men, some in orange jumpsuits, seated alone against a stark backdrop, did little to answer who was actually behind the attacks. In fact, the confessions contradicted public statements by other officials.

With Iraq reeling from a third wave of bombings on Tuesday, the investigations as much as the attacks themselves have undermined public faith in the government by exposing the deep divisions within Iraq’s security forces. After months of wrangling over an election law, fighting spurred by deep ethnic divisions, the public has come to view security as little more than an extension of politics.

The chief antagonists are Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, who has direct authority over security in the capital through the Baghdad Operations Command, and the minister of the interior, Jawad al-Bolani, who oversees the nation’s police while at the same time leading a political alliance competing against Mr. Maliki. There is also a deep divide between Mr. Maliki and a Shiite coalition he broke from to run with his own alliance.

“We are witnessing now a new trend of conflict based on political disagreement,” said Dr. Hazim al-Nuaimi, a political analyst in Baghdad. “The election is approaching, and the people in charge of security are politicians competing on different lists. That is destroying any cooperation and coordination between them. The result is a security gap and the blood of more innocent Iraqi civilians.”

Large numbers of the security forces are more loyal to political parties than to the state, according to security officials.

Even as bodies were being pulled from the rubble of bomb sites on Tuesday, Mr. Maliki’s critics condemned the government. Sunni and secular politicians, some of whom played a key role in turning the tribes against Sunni insurgents and are critical to maintaining peace, also went on national television Tuesday night to demand that Mr. Maliki’s top commanders resign.

Mr. Maliki, in a brief statement late on Wednesday, announced the dismissal of the head of the Baghdad Operations Command, Gen. Aboud Qanbar. He replaced him with Lt. Gen. Ahmed Ouda, a deputy chief of staff in the Iraqi Army. Mr. Maliki appointed General Qanbar in 2007 and stood by him after previous lapses, despite widespread criticism. But the replacement is unlikely to silence critics, who have found fault with the overall security structure.

The public’s fears about the dangerous convergence of violence and politics are bolstered by memories of the 2005 elections, when it took five months to seat a government, during which time sectarian tensions boiled over into civil war.

The failure to provide a credible public accounting for repeated attacks aimed at crippling the state’s ability to function, and to make any significant change after each bombing, encouraged the deep skepticism that greeted official statements after Tuesday’s attacks.

“We have a transparency problem between the security forces and the people,” said Maj. Gen. Ahmed al-Khafaji, the deputy interior minister. Even though he is charged with overseeing the security of government buildings, he said, “I know nothing about the results of the investigations.”

The government’s public response followed a predictable routine. Dozens of arrests were announced, including members of the security forces, but many were quietly released, according to government officials. Snippets of televised confessions were trumpeted, even as politicians from different ethnic groups outlined contradictory accounts of who was behind the attacks. Syria was blamed by some, mainly Shiites, and Iran blamed by others, mainly Sunnis. The heads of the various security agencies sparred over responsibility. And Parliament’s calls for a public accounting of security lapses were ignored.

Photo

An Iraqi police officer patrolled near the Baghdad courthouse that was a target on Tuesday.Credit
Eros Hoagland for The New York Times

“The government announcements after the October bombings cannot be believed because of what we saw Tuesday,” said Ammar Tuma, a lawmaker from the Shiite Fadhila party.

Parliament once again demanded that the heads of the security forces appear before them on Thursday.

“Now we are facing elections and 70 percent of the government ministers, especially those charged with security, are candidates in the elections,” Bahaa al-Araji, a Shiite lawmaker aligned with the anti-American cleric Moktada al-Sadr, said in Parliament hours after Tuesday’s bombings. Shirwan al-Waeli, Iraq’s minister of national security, who is politically aligned with Mr. Maliki’s party, acknowledged the danger of political rivalries in security affairs.

You are already subscribed to this email.

Mr. Maliki has repeatedly pointed to Syria and former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party as being behind the attacks — which he did again on Tuesday.

But Mr. Maliki has been on a broader campaign in recent months against Baathists, at one point even saying he would use his “constitutional power” to prevent the Baath Party from gaining power in Parliament.

Those comments came several weeks ago, after two prominent former Baath Party politicians — Ayad Allawi and Saleh al-Mutlaq — announced an alliance, the Iraqi National Movement, that represents a potent challenge to Mr. Maliki’s State of Law alliance.

The Baath Party is now split into two wings, but both have denied any involvement in the August and October bombings. While the men who confessed to taking part in the plot blamed the Baathists, the Iraqi Islamic State, an umbrella group for Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a largely homegrown insurgency group with some foreign leadership, has claimed responsibility.

The prime minister went on national television on Wednesday to call for everyone to put aside their political differences since they were undermining security.

“These tragedies should not be used to provoke disputes under different title or for political propaganda, as some may do,” he said. “Because if our structure falls, then it falls over the heads of all — and no side gets a benefit, no political bloc or electoral list.”

Mr. Maliki’s aides have defended his handling of the investigations, while noting his rivals’ conflicts of interest.

“Mr. Maliki is occupying the highest political post in the country and he is a politician,” said Ali al-Musawi, one of his press aides. “It is different with Mr. Bolani. He should be busy with his security work rather than politics.”

Mr. Bolani, meanwhile, has said that his political aspirations do not interfere with his security duties, noting on several occasions that he, after all, is not responsible for security in Baghdad.

“The security operation is suffering from a struggle of wills,” said Kamal al-Zaidy, the chairman of the Baghdad Provincial Council, whose headquarters were devastated in the October bombings. He described an emergency meeting called by government leaders to investigate the attacks as a farce.

“It was not a real security meeting,” he said. “It was an arena of accusations and competition for power. If security is to be run like this, we can kiss security in Baghdad goodbye.”

Saad al-Izzi and Omar al-Jawoshy contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on December 10, 2009, on Page A17 of the New York edition with the headline: In Iraq, Politics Is Seen Trumping Security. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe